Malpractice statement

Complaints about publication or research malpractice are reviewed fairly, impartially, and expeditiously. The corresponding investigation is carried out by qualified personnel that includes: the Journal Director, the Chief Editor, the Executive Editor and members of the Editorial Board.

1 Redundancies in a received manuscript (includes the simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to other journals) or a published article.

The redundancy of a publication can take different forms including: literal duplication and partial duplication (it can be substantial or moderate). Submitting the same manuscript in several languages will also be considered a redundant publication.

When a case of redundancy is detected (either by one of the reviewers or through a complaint filed by a reader), the Thematic Editor gathers the documentary evidence and, together with the Chief Editor, compares the submitted manuscript and the possible previously published version. and check the degree of overlap or redundancy.

If no overlap is detected, the reviewer (and/or the person who complained) is notified and revision of the manuscript proceeds.

A high level of redundancy is considered (among others): submitting the same manuscript with different titles, the same manuscript with a different order of authors, similar results based on the same data set. These types of redundancy may occur in different manuscripts submitted to RIM or in manuscripts submitted to different journals. In all cases, all authors of the article will be contacted in writing. This document must include a copy of the letter of authorship received stating that the submitted manuscript has not been published elsewhere. Documentary evidence of duplication will also be sent. In the same writing, it must be made clear that the article is rejected, explaining the position of the magazine and the behavior expected in the future.

If the redundancy was detected after the publication of the article, the Editorial Board will consider publishing a statement or withdrawing the article. It is advisable to communicate the decision made to all the authors of the manuscript. Taking into account the explanations given by the author (or authors), the Editor-in-Chief may consider communicating the case and the decision made to the institution where those involved work. Finally, the reviewer or complainant is informed of the results of the process. Whenever necessary, the editor of the other publication involved will be informed.

If the level of redundancy is low (fractionated elements within the text, justified reanalysis of the data), write to the responsible author explaining the position of the journal and requesting that they make the consequent changes. Depending on the response obtained, continuing the review of the manuscript can be assessed. If the article has already been published, the Chief Editor will consider including a statement in the document and communicating the case to the institution where the authors involved work. As in the previous case, it is necessary to communicate the results to the reviewer or to the one who presented the complaint about the decision made.

2. Sending the same manuscript in different languages

The submission of the same manuscript in different languages will not be accepted. These cases will be treated as high redundancy cases and will be rejected.

Only exceptionally will RIM accept the submission of a manuscript of an article that has already been published in another language. For this, the Editorial Board will make sure to obtain the necessary permissions, both from the publisher that published first and from the people who have some type of right over the article.

3. Suspected or reported plagiarism

Plagiarism is considered when one author uses another author's work or data without their consent. Forms of plagiarism are considered: the literal copy of a manuscript and paraphrasing.

A literal copy is understood as the exact reproduction of a work, either totally or partially, without the authorization of the original author.

If a case of plagiarism is detected (whether by the reviewer of a submitted manuscript or by a complaint from a reader about a published article), the Thematic Editor gathers the documentary evidence and, together with the Chief Editor, determines its scope and therefore the procedure to be followed. continue.

If no plagiarism is detected, a written thank you is sent to the person who alerted the possible case and the decision to continue with the editorial process is explained in the same document.

If a case of redundancy is detected, the procedure described for these cases is followed.

If it is a case of plagiarism, all authors are informed in writing explaining RIM's position. In the same document, the cover letter must be attached where it is declared that the submitted work is original and the author's work.

If the plagiarism is substantial, documentary evidence is also sent. In the same document it is indicated that the manuscript is rejected. Depending on the response provided by the author(s), it is possible to consider informing their superiors and/or the potential victim. If it is an already published article, the editors of the other publications involved will be informed. Removing the article from RIM or publishing a retraction will be valued. In all cases, the results of the process will be notified to the reviewer or to the readers and victims of plagiarism.

If the plagiarism is partial, the author(s) is requested to make the corresponding changes in the text and include the corresponding citations. In case of an affirmative answer, the revision of the text continues. If it is an already published article, publishing a correction including omitted citations will be valued.

It is noted that plagiarism can also have legal consequences and therefore the advice of a lawyer is recommended in these cases.

4. Misappropriation of research results

Authorship of research results is generally a matter of verifiable fact. If there are doubts (or a claim has been made) about whether the results included in a manuscript do not belong to the authors of the manuscript, the Theme Editor and the Editor-in-Chief must make the pertinent inquiries both with the alleged authors and with their respective institutions. . The procedure to follow is similar to that for plagiarism claims. If misappropriation of the results is confirmed, the manuscript will be formally rejected and it will be valued to inform the superiors of the author (or authors). If the manuscript has been published, a note, a correction or a retraction will be published as the case may be. The reviewer, the person who filed the complaint, and the alleged victim will be informed of the results of the process.

5. Suspicion or denunciation of fabricated data in a manuscript received or published

If during the manuscript review process suspicions arise about the authenticity of the data presented or a complaint is received in this regard, the Thematic Editor will contact the author (or authors) explaining the concerns raised. If the answer is satisfactory, the author is thanked and apologies are presented. In the case of a published article, a correction can be issued if deemed appropriate. If the response is unsatisfactory or there is an admission of guilt, all authors are informed that they will contact their superiors and the relevant institutions requesting an investigation. If the authors are found guilty, the manuscript is rejected. If it is an already published article, a retraction will be published. If guilt is not proven, the perpetrators will receive the appropriate apologies. If it is an already published article and the institutions involved do not carry out the requested research, a note will be published expressing concern regarding the data. In all cases, the reviewers or those who filed the complaint will be informed of the results of the process.

6. Image manipulation

Any procedure that alters, enhances, obscures, moves, removes or adds any particular feature of an image will not be accepted. Adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color enhancement are supported, as long as they do not obscure or remove information present in the original image. The manipulation of images to improve their sharpness is accepted. Performing this procedure for other purposes will be considered ethical abuse and treated accordingly.

7. How to deal with someone who files a complaint or report

In the event that any thematic editor or reviewer receives a complaint or denunciation in which the scientific validity of a publication is criticized or allegations of plagiarism, manipulation of figures or any other form of malpractice are made, they will transmit this complaint to the Editor-in-Chief . If the complaint received does not contain specific elements that allow an evaluation, the complainant will be asked to provide them. If he is unable to present these arguments, he will be informed that the investigation will not continue. If convincing arguments are presented, the pertinent investigation will be carried out following the COPE directives. The results of the investigation will always be communicated to the person who filed the complaint.

If the complaint is made through social networks, it will be requested that it be presented through the appropriate channels. If it is accompanied by specific arguments, it will be answered in the same network that the pertinent investigation will be carried out. The exchange of criteria through social networks will be avoided. In the event that the person making the complaint wishes to remain anonymous, that wish will be respected.